02-10-1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Page 7 February 10, 1997 • Mounds View City Council cross at one point on Highway 10, unless sidewalks are provided. Furthermore, if safety is such an issue, why haven't more sidewalks been added. Dave Mehick, (inaudible-Spring Lake Park Road), noted the city has expended $55,000 on the project which cannot be recouped. He wondered if the city has thought about the liability of not proceeding with the project after spending this amount, should there be a severe injury or fatality crossing Highway 10. Jerry Linke, 2319 Knoll Road, stated in response to the comment on lack of input, there was a Trailways Committee that met and Focus 2000 talked about the separation between the North and the South areas of the community. The bridge would help to identify Mounds View. Information was provided to residents as to what they could expect as far as tax increases if the project were funded that way. Additionally, the $190,000 local cost was discussed at numerous meetings. Mr. Linke noted a Public Hearing was held before the actual grant process. In response to the benefits to Mounds View Square versus the benefits to the city, he feels if the city can keep one business due to better access, it is also a benefit to the city. Tamara McBride, stated she is a student at Edgewood Middle School and she is also concerned about safety. Often she is assigned report projects which require her to go to the Ramsey County Library. It is difficult to get transportation there and often the kids end up putting themselves at risk by having to cross Highway 10. She is in support of the bridge. Marshall Johnston, 5701 Bunker Hill Drive, asked if the council had considered using MSA funding to finance part of the project. He noted that another financing option to consider is an interest-free advancement. Jerry Linke stated MSA funding was discussed early on, but at that time the city was told they could not use it for this purpose. There were no fiuther public comments and Mayor McCarty stated there are several issues he would like the staffto examine before a final decision is made on this project. He proceeded to address these concerns. MOTION/SECOND: Trude/Quick that the Council continue to allow the pedestrian bridge to move forward. Council member Trade stated she has had several telephone calls from residents who were very alarmed that since the new council members took office the council has suddenly been backtracking and looking at every issue that was voted on in the past two to three years. She is very concerned about that precedent occurring on any project and feels it give the city a bad reputation in the metropolitan community. She is concerned about the city's reputation when they go out to apply for other grants. She thinks irreparable harm will be done to the community if the city turns its back on a grant that it went out and sought based on community input. She would ask that everyone give this matter sincere consideration. MOTION/SECOND: Koopmeiners/Stigney to postpone the council's decision on the pedestrian bridge until the February 24, 1997 City Council Meeting. VOTE: 4 ayes 1 nay (Trade) Motion Carried Mayor McCarty asked Attorney Long to check out Section 804, Subdivision 3 of the Charter, to see if the pedestrian bridge would be affected by this section of the Charter. •